Page 1
1 Last revised February 2018
George Mason University
College of Education and Human Development
Education Leadership Program
Course Syllabus
EDLE 616.A01 Curriculum Development & Evaluation (3 credits)
Summer, 2018.
[May22 – June 23: Tuesdays & Thursdays @ 4:30pm - 7:10pm; Saturdays @ 9:00am – 12:30pm]
Thompson Hall L018 (TH L018)
Faculty
Name: Dr. Fawzia Fazily
Office Hours: By Appointment
Office Location: Thompson Hall suite 1300
Email Address: [email protected]
Prerequisites/Corequisites
EDLE 620, EDLE 690, and EDLE 791.
University Catalog Course Description
EDLE 616 examines relationship of written, taught, and tested curriculum; and identifies critical
leadership decisions that can positively impact student achievement. Identifies components of
effective curriculum guides, and constructs a Curriculum Design model for emerging leaders. Mini
document for personal use is constructed.
Course Delivery Method
A variety of instructional methods are used to cover the subject matter and create a dynamic,
interactive learning environment. These methods may include large and small group discussions,
case studies, media, Internet assignments, lecture, guest practitioners, group presentations,
interviews, collaborative learning and reflection. There is some out-of-class work expected. THE
CHALLENGE IS TO BECOME A COMMUNITY OF LEARNERS.
Learner Outcomes or Objectives
Students who successfully complete the requirements for EDLE 616 will be able to:
[i] demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of curriculum design, development and evaluation and
connect all parts to ELCC standards in the design [and presentation] of a mini curriculum
framework
Page 2
2 Last revised February 2018
[ii] demonstrate the ability to analyze school demographic and assessment data and use the same to
create a professional development plan [PDP] to improve student performance in two critical areas
[iii] identify an emerging/controversial issue in curriculum development/evaluation and create a
plan to serve as a guide for educators to fully understand it [the plan should connect best
thinking/practices on the issue to 2 or 3 essential questions]
[iv] investigate the components of a well-formed BOE policy on curriculum
development/evaluation and apply that knowledge to solve a problem either at a specific grade level
or content area.
Professional Standards The importance of strengthening and guiding instruction in educational
settings is a leadership theme of academic and professional organizations alike. The purpose of the
course is to strengthen the knowledge, skills and dispositions of EDLE candidates as instructional
leaders and managers. The course provides models for (1) designing and managing curriculum; (2)
relating to school board policy, professional development, and budget to effective instructional
leadership; (3) constructing effective teacher-friendly curriculum guides; and (4) collecting and
using demographic data to create a plan for improved student performance.
This course meets applicable competencies, standards, and guidelines set forth by the Virginia
Department of Education (VA DOE), Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISSLC),
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), and Educational Leadership
Constituent Council (ELCC), as shown below.
VA DOE Competencies (a 1,3,4,5 and 6; c1; e1; f 4,5}
NCATE Guidelines (Strategic Leadership: 1.3, 1.6, 2.4; Instructional Leadership: 3.3, 3.4,
3.5, 3.6. 3.9; Organizational Leadership: 9.1)
ELCC Standards [2011]: (1.1), (1.2), (1.3), (1.4), (2.2), (2.3), (2.4), (3.4), (3.5), (4.1),
(6.2) and (6.3).
Texts
Required text
Mooney, Nancy J & Ann T. Mausbach (2008). Align the Design: A Blueprint for School
Improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development
[ASCD].
Reference texts (optional…. purchase not required)
Jacobs, Hayes H. (2010) Curriculum 21: Essential Education for a Changing World
Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)
Page 3
3 Last revised February 2018
Course Performance Evaluation
Because EDLE 616 is a graduate level course, high quality work is expected in class and on
all assignments. Assignments 1, 2, 3 are graded by a rubric. In this way, the rubric can both
inform the completion of the assignments and serve as an instrument to assess your grade for
the activity.
This course is designed to further develop and expand your managerial and ethical skills in
the areas of instructional leadership and management. You will be assessed on your ability
to analyze situations from the broad perspective of an emerging school administrator, and be
expected to view the impact of the decisions from a systematic perspective and from the
benefit to student learning.
The grading assessment scales and assigned percentages shown below are guidelines only.
Your final grade for the semester will reflect the instructor’s judgment of your classroom
performance as you attempt to demonstrate leadership behaviors, perspectives and attitudes.
Students may rewrite an assignment [other than the final project] for re-grading within one
week of receipt. The original assignment should be clipped/stapled to the re-write.
TK20 Performance-Based Assessment Submission Requirements
Every student registered for any EDLE Course with a required performance-based
assessment is required to submit these assessments, [a] Demographic Analysis of Data, and
[b] Curriculum Design Framework] to TK20 through Blackboard (regardless of whether
the student is taking the course as an elective, a onetime course or as part of an
undergraduate minor). Evaluation of the performance-based assessment by the course
instructor will also be completed in Tk20 through Blackboard. Failure to submit the
assessment to Tk20 (through Blackboard) will result in the course instructor reporting the
course grade as Incomplete (IN). Unless the IN grade is changed upon completion of the
required Tk20 submission, the IN will convert to some F nine weeks into the following
semester.
Course Requirements: You are expected to attend each class because discussion,
presentations and hands-on activities are critical parts of the course. The completion of and
reflection on assigned readings, constructive participation in discussions and group work
as well as on-line communication with group members are routine expectations. Access to a
computer and a GMU email account are essential because you will receive important
information from the university only on your GMU account and only GMU email accounts
may be used to communicate with the instructor.
If missing a class is unavoidable, you are responsible for notifying the instructor (preferably
in advance). It is your responsibility to check with class colleagues for notes and
assignments and complete any missed assignments and readings, etc. before the start of
the next class. All absences may affect your final grade because of the heavy emphasis on
Page 4
4 Last revised February 2018
class participation. All written assignments must be completed on a word processor (unless
otherwise indicated) and turned in on or before the due date.
Late assignments will lower your grade on the project, and will not be accepted or given
credit if received 48 hours late. Specific course requirements and assigned due dates may be
altered as the instructor receives input from you and your classmates about your school
calendars. To plan and complete group projects, you may need to meet with other group
members at times other than during scheduled class sessions.
Grading Scale:
Participation in class [attendance, class blog, class discourse] 20 points
Assignment #1 …………………….………………………………… 15 points
Assignment #2…………………………………………………………25 points
Assignment #3………………………………………………………… 40 points
TOTAL: 100 points
A+=100+ points A=95-100 points A- =90-94 points
B+=87-89 points B=83 -86 points B- =80 -82 points
C=75 -79 points F=74 points or below
Page 5
5 Last revised February 2018
Class Schedule
Tentative Schedule
Date Topic Essential Questions Readings, etc. Assignment Due
Dates
Session 1
Tuesday May
22
Introductions
Course Overview
Assignment #1
introduce
What is the purpose of
Curriculum?
[a] Tuttle [Bb]
[b] Ken Robinson [Bb]
[c] ’50 Influences’
Session 2
Thursday
May 24
Explore GMU library How to locate
resources?
How to conduct
research?
Visit Fenwick Library
Session 3
Saturday
May 26
Historical Foundations
of Curriculum
Assignment #1 –Q/A
What is/should be the
purpose of Curriculum?
[a] McGuffey’s Readers
examined[Bb]
[b] Glatthorn [Bb]
[c] Aaron Huey
Session 4
Tuesday May
29
Philosophical
Foundations of
Curriculum
What is/should be the
purpose of Curriculum?
Which philosophies
prevail in today’s
educational world?
[a] Ornstein [Bb]
[b] Mr. Keating [YouTube-
Bb]
[c] Ethics Podcast [Bb]
Assignment #1
due
Session 5
Thursday
May31
Sociology of
Curriculum
Assignment #2- Q/A
What is/should be the
purpose of Curriculum?
How are the tensions
between ‘functionalists’
and ‘conflict theorists’
resolved via
Curriculum change?
[a] Berliner [Bb]
[b] Sociology [YouTube-Bb]
[c] Intelligent Design on
Trial-PBS-Bb]
Session 6
Saturday
June 2
Politics of Curriculum
NCLB to ESEA: Quo
Vadis, Public
Schools?
What is/should be the
purpose of Curriculum?
How do ‘politics’ affect
the development of
Curriculum?
[a] ‘Politics & Education
Don’t Mix’ [Bb]
[b] Politics of Curriculum
[simulation on Bb]
Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 5
Page 6
6 Last revised February 2018
Session 7
Tuesday
June5
Conceptual
Frameworks:
[a] Understanding By
Design
[b] Mapping
Why select UBD
(Understanding by
Design) as a conceptual
framework?
[a] ASCD Grant Wiggins
[video]
[b] Heidi Hayes Jacobs:
Curriculum Mapping [TED
talk]
Session 8
Thursday
June 7
The Taught & Hidden
Curriculum
Are Pacing Guides the
‘master’ or ‘servant’ to
the Taught Curriculum?
How important is ‘The
Taught Curriculum’ in
the written-taught-
tested tripod in
schools?
[a] ‘Collaborative Planning’
&
‘The World Peace Game’
[Bb]
[b] Julie Healy essay on
Pacing Guides [Bb]
[c] Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 3
Session 9
Saturday
June 9
The Written
Curriculum
Who should write the
Curriculum [and why]?
How do school systems
balance these interests:
Sols; Pacing Guides,
Programs of Study?
[a] Generic versus Specific
Curriculum, & FCPS
Written Curriculum [Bb]
[b] Case Study: ‘Who Needs
Lesson Plans?’ [Bb]
[c] Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 1
Assignment #2
due
Session 10
Tuesday
June 12
The Tested
Curriculum
UBD [Understanding
by Design] introduced
Assignment #3
continued..
If Testing has become
an ‘end’ & a ‘means’,
what role should
Curriculum play?
[a] ‘The 500 Pound Gorilla’
[Bb]
[b] ‘Testing, Testing’
[WPost] on [Bb]
[c] Mooney & Mausbach,
Appendices A & B-
Session 11
Thursday
June 14
Understanding by
Design [6 facets]
Curriculum Mapping
Joining the Dots..
Which conceptual
frameworks best join
the [SOL] dots—the
taught, written and
tested Curriculum?
Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 6
Session 12
Saturday
June 16
Curriculum
Alignment
Curriculum Evaluation
What are the purposes
& effects of
Alignment?
Who should evaluate
the Curriculum?
[a] The Bellevue K-12
Maths Case Study [Bb]
[b] ‘TAH Social Studies
Lesson’ [Bb]
[b] Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 2
Page 7
7 Last revised February 2018
Session 13
Tuesday
June 19
Curriculum
Development &
Professional
Development
In what ways does
Professional
Development Support
Curriculum
Development?
[a] Dennis Sparks: [i] 5
Models and [ii] Leadership
Forum [Bb]
[b] Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 8
Session 14
Tuesday
June 21
Curriculum
Development &
Professional
Development
In what ways does
Professional
Development Support
Curriculum
Development?
[a] Dennis Sparks: [i] 5
Models and [ii] Leadership
Forum [Bb]
[b] Mooney & Mausbach,
Chapter 8
Session 15
Thursday
June 23
Standards-Based
Practice: Common
Core examined
In what [curriculum]
ways is Common Core
different?
[a] How to read Common
Core [Bb]
[b] Bill Nye on Common
Core [Bb]
[c] Student POV [Bb]
Assignment #3
[both parts] due
Note: Faculty reserves the right to alter the schedule as necessary, with notification to students.
Core Values Commitment
The College of Education and Human Development is committed to collaboration, ethical
leadership, innovation, research-based practice, and social justice. Students are expected to adhere
to these principles: http://cehd.gmu.edu/values/.
GMU Policies and Resources for Students
Policies
Students must adhere to the guidelines of the Mason Honor Code (see
https://catalog.gmu.edu/policies/honor-code-system/).
Students must follow the university policy for Responsible Use of Computing (see
http://universitypolicy.gmu.edu/policies/responsible-use-of-computing/).
Students are responsible for the content of university communications sent to their Mason
email account and are required to activate their account and check it regularly. All
communication from the university, college, school, and program will be sent to students
solely through their Mason email account.
Page 8
8 Last revised February 2018
Students with disabilities who seek accommodations in a course must be registered with
George Mason University Disability Services. Approved accommodations will begin at the
time the written letter from Disability Services is received by the instructor (see
http://ods.gmu.edu/).
Students must follow the university policy stating that all sound emitting devices shall be
silenced during class unless otherwise authorized by the instructor.
Campus Resources
• Support for submission of assignments to Tk20 should be directed to
[email protected] or https://cehd.gmu.edu/aero/tk20. Questions or concerns
regarding use of Blackboard should be directed to http://coursessupport.gmu.edu/. ‘
• For information on student support resources on campus, see
https://ctfe.gmu.edu/teaching/student-support-resources-on-campus
For information on the College of Education and Human development, please visit our website
https://cehd.gmu.edu/students/ .
Page 9
9 Last revised February 2018
Assignment #1 [15 points]
Identify critical school board policy for curriculum development and evaluation
[Individual Assignment]
Purpose:
As educators, it is important that we have a clear understanding of the educational policies
developed by our school boards, and our responsibility as educational leaders to implement them.
This assignment will challenge your ability to investigate a particular policy adopted by a chosen
school board and examine its impact on student learning and achievement.
Assignment:
Prepare at minimum a 6 to 8 page, double spaced essay that investigates one chosen school board
policy and analyze its components in relation to the needs of a [i] specific grade level or [ii] content
area. Candidates will conduct interviews with administrators and/or multiple stakeholders in order
to gain detailed knowledge of the policy and its impact at the local school level.
School Board Policy Assessment Rubric [Assignment #1]
[Candidates understand and can anticipate and assess emerging trends and initiatives in
order to adapt school-based leadership strategies. [ELCC: 6.3]
Criteria Exceeds
Expectations
90 to 100%
Meets
Expectations
80 to 89%
Approaching
Expectations
70 to 79%
Falls Below
Expectations
0 to 69%
Includes a
statement that
relates to area
of study
[weighting
15%]
The statement is
clear with
adequate
reference to the
needs of student
learners.
The statement
is clear with
adequate
reference to
learners.
The statement is
vague or
rambling with
some reference to
student learning.
No statement is
included.
Connections
made from
School Board
Policy to grade
Connections
from School
Board Policy to
grade level
and/or content
area are clearly
Connections
from School
Board Policy to
grade level
Connections
from School
Board Policy to
grade level
and/or content
No connections
are made.
Page 10
10 Last revised February 2018
level and/or
content area
[weighting
45%]
and concisely
explained.
and/or content
area listed.
area are vaguely
suggested
Candidates
conduct
interviews with
an
Administration
or [b]
Stakeholders
regarding
selected policy
[weighting
35%]
The impact of
the School
Board Policy is
clearly and
concisely
presented from
multiple
interviews [a
and b].
The impact of
the School
Board Policy is
presented from
either interview
[a] or interview
[b].
The impact of the
School Board
Policy is
discussed in
general terms.
The impact of the
School Board
Policy is not
discussed.
Spelling,
grammar,
mechanics
[weighting 5%]
The project is
error free and
clearly and
professionally
presented
The project has
no spelling
errors and no
more than two
mechanical
errors.
The project has
some spelling
grammar, and/or
mechanical
errors.
The project has
multiple errors in
spelling, and/or
mechanics
Page 11
11 Last revised February 2018
Assignment #2 [25 points]
Study of Demographic Information and Assessment Data
for Improved Student Performance
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate students’ ability to analyze demographic and test
data (Standards of Learning or other test results) as it relates to curriculum and/or instructional
improvement. Each student will obtain the above-mentioned information from their schools, and
analyze strengths/weaknesses of existing SIP/Action Plans with a view to helping teachers improve
student performance in two curriculum areas. Candidates should also include recommendations
for involving school staff in the change process, including relevant (recent) research-based
strategies as a part of the effort to lead school improvement.
Assignment
Prepare, at minimum, a Mini-Case Study (12 to 15 pages, including graphics) utilizing the analysis
of actual demographic and test data from your school, and, after examining existing site-based
SIP/Action Plans at your school, analyze the strengths and weaknesses in the SIP/Action Plans with
a view to helping teachers/staff members improve student performance in the two targeted
curriculum areas.
Plan of Action
1. Locate the most recent AYP/AMO data for your school.
2. Identify demographic information for your school as it relates to AYP/AMO data for NCLB
sub-groups.
3. Analyze the data in two academic areas. Include a brief description of your findings and
conclusions regarding curriculum/instruction deficit areas.
4. Examine and critique existing site-based “action plans” (focusing on strengths and weaknesses)
that target the two curriculum areas you selected for improving student achievement. Discuss
with colleagues in your school why this problem exists [and why it persists] and probable causes
for action plan strengths/weaknesses.
5. Locate 3 current research-based strategies (recent) that would help [i] target the identified deficit
areas, and [ii] strengthen (and improve) the delivery of curriculum/instruction to improve future
student performance in those areas.
6. Finally, make recommendations to site-based leadership on ways to involve school staff in the
change process.
Page 12
12 Last revised February 2018
Levels of Achievement
Criteria exceeds
expectations
meets
expectations
approaching
expectations
falls below
expectations
ELCC 4.1:
Candidates
understand and
can collaborate
with faculty and
community
members by
collecting and
analyzing
information
pertinent to the
improvement of
the school’s
educational
environment.
Weight 20.00%
90 to 100 %
Cultural diversity
in the school and
its community is
described and
analyzed (race,
ethnicity, gender,
age, socio-
economic status,
English language
learners, and
special education)
over at least the
last three years.
80 to 89 %
Cultural
diversity in the
school is
described and
analyzed (race,
ethnicity,
gender, age,
socio-economic
levels, English
language
learners, and
special
education) over
the last three
years.
70 to 79 %
Cultural
diversity is
described and
analyzed, but
lacks
information on
all 7 categories.
0 to 69 %
Cultural diversity
of either the school
or community is
analyzed, but not
both.
ELCC 1.2:
Candidates
demonstrate
that they
understand and
can use data to
plan, identify
and achieve
school goals
Weight 15.00%
90 to 100 %
Candidate
provides evidence
of a superior
ability to collect
and use data to
identify school
goals, assess
organizational
effectiveness, and
create and
implement plans to
achieve school
goals.
80 to 89 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of an
adequate ability
to collect and
use data to
identify school
goals, assess
organizational
effectiveness,
and create and
implement plans
to achieve
school goals.
70 to 79 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of
some ability to
collect and use
data to identify
school goals,
assess
organizational
effectiveness,
and create and
implement plans
to achieve
school goals.
0 to 69 %
Candidate does not
provide evidence,
or demonstrates an
inability to collect
and use data to
identify school
goals, assess
organizational
effectiveness, and
create and
implement plans to
achieve school
goals.
ELCC 1.3:
Candidate'
demonstrate the
ability to
promote
continual and
sustainable
school
improvement
Weight 15.00%
90 to 100 %
Candidate
provides evidence
of a superior
ability to promote
continual and
sustainable school
improvement.
80 to 89 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of an
adequate ability
to promote
continual and
sustainable
school
improvement.
70 to 79 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of
some ability to
promote
continual and
sustainable
school
improvement.
0 to 69 %
Candidate does not
provide evidence,
or demonstrates an
inability to promote
continual and
sustainable school
improvement.
Page 13
13 Last revised February 2018
ELCC 1.4
Candidates
understand and
can evaluate
school progress
and revise
school plans
supported by
school
stakeholders
Weight 10.00%
90 to 100 %
Candidate
provides evidence
of a superior
ability to evaluate
school progress
and revise school
plans supported by
school
stakeholders.
80 to 89 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of an
adequate ability
to evaluate
school progress
and revise
school plans
supported by
school
stakeholders.
70 to 79 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of
some ability to
evaluate school
progress and
revise school
plans supported
by school
stakeholders.
0 to 69 %
Candidate does not
provide evidence,
or demonstrates an
inability to evaluate
school progress and
revise school plans
supported by
school
stakeholders.
ELCC 2.2
Candidates
understand and
can create and
evaluate a
comprehensive,
rigorous, and
coherent
curricular and
instructional
school program.
Weight 15.00%
90 to 100 %
Current school
action plan(s) are
analyzed in
relation to
identified
achievement gap
areas. Instructional
practices,
instructional
programs, and
assessments that
support student
learning in two
curriculum areas
are described and
evaluated.
80 to 89 %
Current school
action plan(s)
are analyzed in
relation to
identified
achievement gap
areas.
Instructional
practices and/or
instructional
programs, and/or
assessments that
support student
learning in two
curriculum areas
are described
and evaluated.
70 to 79 %
Current school
action plan(s)
are analyzed in
relation to
identified
achievement gap
areas.
Instructional
practices,
programs, and
assessments are
not clearly
described or
evaluated.
0 to 69 %
Limited analysis
provided of school
action plan(s) in
relation to
identified
achievement gap
areas. Instructional
practices,
programs, and
assessments are not
addressed.
ELCC 3.4
Candidates
understand and
can develop
school capacity
for distributed
leadership.
Weight 20.00%
90 to 100 %
Recommendations
highlight
appropriate
research strategies
to promote
improved student
achievement in
two curriculum
areas and involve
school staff in the
change process.
Strategies reflect
students’ learning
needs analyzed
from the school’s
80 to 89 %
Recommendatio
ns highlight
appropriate
research
strategies to
promote
improved
student
achievement in
ONE curricular
area and involve
school staff in
the change
process.
Strategies reflect
70 to 79 %
Recommendatio
ns include
limited evidence
of appropriate
research
strategies to
improve student
achievement and
may involve
school staff in
the change
process.
Strategies may
not reflect
0 to 69 %
Recommendation
does not include
appropriate
research strategies,
involve the school
staff, or connect to
students’ learning
needs.
Page 14
14 Last revised February 2018
demographic and
assessment data.
students’
learning needs
analyzed from
the school’s
demographic and
assessment data.
students’
learning needs.
Spelling,
grammar,
mechanics.
Weight 5.00%
90 to 100 %
The project is
error free and is
clearly and
professionally
presented.
80 to 89 %
The project has
no spelling
errors and no
more than two
mechanical
errors.
70 to 79 %
The project has
some spelling,
grammar and/or
mechanical
errors.
0 to 69 %
The project has
multiple errors in
spelling and/or
mechanics.
Page 15
15 Last revised February 2018
Assignment #3 Design of Curriculum Framework [40 points]
The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate—on a smaller scale-- knowledge of program
design in curriculum as evidenced in the creation of a problem-based model to be used by emerging
leaders in your field.
An example might be the creation of a design framework that addresses a specific, site-based
problem, in the creation of a 5 to 6 PD Course sequence to help classroom teachers better integrate
technology into their day-to-day practice.
As one of the middle courses in the licensure program, creating a leadership framework allows
students [i] an opportunity to reflect on what they've learned about site-based leadership to date and
[ii] what they would still like to explore. Finally, creating the framework ties all [if not most] of the
major elements of EDLE 616 together, allowing students to apply what they’ve learned in a
concrete way [theory to practice], such as aligning the program [written, taught, tested curriculum]
with standards and assessments, as well as implementing the ideas of Backwards Design [UBD].
These concepts can then be applied to any curricular area as a site-based leader. Some examples of
smaller-scale program designs in Curriculum might be: Special Education, Contemporary Issues,
Global Education, Urban Settings, Technology Integration, Leadership for ELL Students, etc.
Instructions:
Students should first explore and research existing several [at least 3] leadership programs, then
individually design and construct a Curriculum Framework [in PowerPoint] for aspiring educational
leaders. The PowerPoint should not exceed 25 to 30 slides, including references that are written in
APA style. Components to be included in the Curriculum Framework are listed below [see Rubric]:
Your curriculum framework is comprised of 3 parts: [i] Part 1 consists of a conceptual design; [ii]
Part 2 comprises 5 to 6 course offerings & brief descriptions, along with course assessment[s]—
formative or summative; and [iii] a UBD designed Professional Development Session [on ONE of
the courses].
For all 3 parts, these components should be included:
1. a philosophy and/or vision for the aspiring leaders’ program [conceptual design]
2. a validation matrix connected to ELCC Standard elements [listed on Syllabus, page 2]...
conceptual design]
Page 16
16 Last revised February 2018
3. a list of the critical knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed by aspiring leaders [
conceptual design]
4. a list of essential questions to guide the content of your curriculum framework [ conceptual
design]
5. evidence of thoughtful inclusion of UBD as part of the 5 to 6 Program [course] design
[coursework]
6. an assessment plan for your curriculum coursework [coursework]
7. a brief Professional Development proposal [on the UBD template [attachment included in
‘exemplar’, Lesson 7] describing how you would roll out ONE of your ‘cutting edge’
courses to your faculty [PD session].
*it is recommended that you submit the Conceptual Design [see items 1, 2, 3 and 4] as a Draft
for feedback, somewhere before or on Lesson 9*
Levels of Achievement
Criteria exceeds
expectations
meets
expectations
approaching
expectations
falls below
expectations
ELCC 6.3
Candidates
demonstrate
skills in adapting
leadership
strategies and
practice to
address emerging
school issues.
Weight 20.00%
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model reflects [i]
current best
practices; [ii]
emerging trends;
[iii] validation by
at least 4
Standards’
authorities; and
[iv] current
research on
Leadership
Programs.
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes [a]
emerging trends,
and [b] 2 other
elements listed.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes [a]
emerging trends,
and [b] 1 other
element listed.
0 to 69 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
suggests
(generally)
trends, best
practices and
current research.
ELCC 6.2
Candidates
understand and
can act to
influence
decisions
affecting student
learning in the
school
environment.
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model
demonstrates
candidate’s
superior ability to
advocate for
policies and
programs that
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
demonstrates
candidate’s
ability to
advocate for
policies and
programs that
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
demonstrates
some capacity to
advocate for
policies and
programs that
promote
0 to 69 %
The proposed
model does not
include evidence
relate to
candidate’s
superior ability
to advocate for
policies and
programs that
Page 17
17 Last revised February 2018
Weight 10.00% promote equitable
learning
opportunities for
all students
promote
equitable
learning
opportunities for
all students
equitable
learning
opportunities for
all students
promote
equitable
learning
opportunities for
all students
ELCC 1.1
Candidates
demonstrate
skills in the
design and
support of a
collaborative
process for
developing and
implementing a
school vision.
Weight 10.00%
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model includes [i]
a strong mission
& philosophy
statement; [ii] a
vision for a
program of
excellence; [iii]
specific indicators
of knowledge,
skills and
dispositions
served; [iv] and at
least 4 essential
questions to guide
the program.
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes 3 out of
the 4 elements
listed.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes 2 out of
the 4 elements
listed.
0 to 69 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
only focuses on
1 of the
elements listed.
ELCC 1.4
Candidates
understand and
can evaluate
school progress
and revise school
plans supported
by school
stakeholders
Weight 10.00%
90 to 100 %
Candidate
provides evidence
of a superior
ability to evaluate
school progress
and revise school
plans supported
by school
stakeholders.
80 to 89 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of an
adequate ability
to evaluate
school progress
and revise
school plans
supported by
school
stakeholders.
70 to 79 %
Candidate
provides
evidence of
some ability to
evaluate school
progress and
revise school
plans supported
by school
stakeholders.
0 to 69 %
Candidate does
not provide
evidence, or
demonstrates an
inability to
evaluate school
progress and
revise school
plans supported
by school
stakeholders.
ELCC 2.2
Candidates
understand and
can create and
evaluate a
comprehensive,
rigorous, and
coherent
curricular and
instructional
school program.
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model
incorporates
current Adult
Learning theories,
multiple
assessment
(formal &
informal) models,
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes 3 out of
the 4 elements
listed.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes 2 out of
the 4 elements
listed.
0 to 69 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
focuses only on
1 element listed.
Page 18
18 Last revised February 2018
Weight 15.00% opportunities to
showcase diverse
learners, and
strong evidence of
the UBD
backward design
model.
ELCC 2.3
Candidates
demonstrate
skills in
designing the use
of differentiated
instructional
strategies,
curriculum
materials, and
evidence of UBD
in design and the
provision of
high-quality
instruction.
Weight 15.00%
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model reflects
differentiation in
the design, and a
strong inquiry-
based approach to
learning in the
entire course
sequence.
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes
evidence of 2
out of the 3
elements listed.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes
evidence of 1
out of the 3
elements listed.
0 to 69 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
only hints at
generalities in
all of the
elements listed.
ELCC 2.4
Candidates
demonstrate
skills in using
technologies for
improved
classroom
instruction,
student
achievement and
continuous
school
improvement.
Weight 10.00%
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model
incorporates the
application of
technologies in
classroom
instruction,
student
achievement, and
school
improvement.
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
includes 2 out of
the 3 elements
listed.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
lists only one of
the elements.
0 to 69 %
No elements are
included in the
overall design.
ELCC 3.5
Candidates
demonstrate that
they can
understand and
ensure that
teacher time
focuses on
supporting high
90 to 100 %
The proposed
curriculum model
demonstrates a
superior
understanding and
ability to protect
and account for
use of time to
80 to 89 %
The proposed
curriculum
model
demonstrates
some
understanding
and ability to
protect and
70 to 79 %
The proposed
curriculum
model
demonstrates
vague or
incomplete
understanding
and ability to
0 to 69 %
The proposed
model does not
provide
evidence of
candidate
understanding
and ability to
protect and
Page 19
19 Last revised February 2018
quality
instruction and
student learning
Weight 5.00%
focus on quality
instruction and
learning for all
students
account for use
of time to focus
on quality
instruction and
learning for all
students
protect and
account for use
of time to focus
on quality
instruction and
learning for all
students
account for use
of time to focus
on quality
instruction and
learning for all
students
Unblemished
Prose.
Weight 5.00%
90 to 100 %
Proposed
curriculum design
model is error
free.
80 to 89 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
contains 1 or 2
errors.
70 to 79 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model
contains 5 or
more errors.
0 to 69 %
Proposed
curriculum
design model is
riddled with
errors.
